It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
I share a lot of your own concerns @Zekidk, but I'm not so sure I'd agree that this is "great marketing" as the news came from an undisclosed source, or leak, and not something that appears to have been well thought out or planned. I'm sure the true intention was for this to be another Franz Oberhauser moment whereby the audience was meant to be surprised and shocked to discover that Lashana Lynch was 007 in the same way that Waltz turned out to be Blofeld. Clearly, the producers appear to be oblivious to the existence of social media and believe that everyone is going to go into their movies spoiler-free. They're almost relying on it, so it would seem. Considering it's now been splashed all across the media it's not going to have the same desired effect. Unless that wasn't the producer's intention to begin with and the real objective was to soften up and prime audiences to the prospect of big changes to come. By that I mean a couple of movies down the line, people can now cite B25 where the 007 prefix was no longer synonymous with James Bond and therefore can use it as leverage to say "...but Lashana Lynch was 007 in B25" to endorse whatever agenda for a big change they want to push.
It's not like it hasn't been done before elsewhere. One only has to look back at Dr. Who when Missy was first introduced as the incarnation of the Master. Some fans pointed out back then that it was cynical attempt to make it acceptable for a future incarnation of the Doctor to be female but were mostly dismissed or shouted down as being hysterical for daring to suggest such a thing. Now I know some members here like Jodie Whittaker as the Doctor along with the SJW brigade, but its popularity has taken a major hit, not just in viewing figures but in merchandising sales for the BBC. Before anyone trots out the Beeb's massaged viewing figures to claim otherwise, I'm not interested because that's not the point I'm trying to make. My point is, if you thought the change wasn't preplanned as far back as the introduction of Michelle Gomez as Missy then you were being wilfully ignorant of the looming changes to come. Lashana Lynch might not be 007 by the end of B25 and the prefix might revert back to Craig (God knows why as it's his last movie), but the objective has already been delivered and that's to lay the foundation to make sweeping changes to the James Bond's character in the near future. The question I ask: was this storyline really necessary for this movie? As @CatchingBullets pointed out it's 2019, and we know how Hollywood is determined to alienate its core fanbase with its gender identity politics in other big blockbusters, so don't at all be surprised to see it in play within the next James Bond movie... or Bond 26. To quote the prophetic Sam Smith lyrics: the writings on the wall.
Also, by a lot of arguments on here Fleming would've been pissed off that M was made into a woman. Oh wait but we enjoyed her, so changing genders can work and her gender was an afterthought because she's such a good M.
Oh yeah remember when Moneypenny was made a black woman and we all really like Naomie Harris and her performance, and her colour was a massive afterthought because she's a great actress and a great Moneypenny.
And now you can't handle a new character being known as 007 for one film, even though it has no real effect on who James Bond is because he quit in the last movie. In the context of this world 007 is a codename, not a person having their gender or race changed. It's just a bloody promotion cause our golden boy decided to quit.
The viewing figures went up, massively.
I meant towards the end of the movie. I just hope that Bond and her don’t work together all the time. Bond is a loner who largely operates alone. That’s the appeal for me.
Yes, self sacrifice would be a good idea.
'Outrage'! :D
@bondsum your point is the equivalent of the "I can't be racist, I have a black friend...." argument.
There are many.
Ridiculous. Even the biggest film-buffs and the biggest critics will go see a film even they think it's gonna be bad cause at the end of the day this film could be great and this idea could really impress people, but as usual people are jumping the shark and given their opinions face value, which doesn't always work out. For example, people thought Waltz was gonna be a great Blofeld. Did that happen? Nope. People thought Monica Bellucci was gonna be a great Bond girl but a sacrificial lamb. Did either of those things happen? Nope.
So you don't like the idea, okay, but at least be open to the idea that it could actually work, because you're first impressions may not always be correct.
Lol! This guy had me rolling! :))
Anyone wanna respond to this?
Yes but they didn't change 007's identity
I can't make it more clear than that
You are always confuse, read it completely then you might be able to understand.
I said "If" they try to make her 007 or replace bond or Nomi as 007.
Really @Pierce2Daniel you can do better than that!
This is not real life office it's a fictional film series not Jason Bourne or any other documentary film where they have to keep everything realistic. If I want realistic office designations and politics I have lots of films to watch besides bond.
STOP MUCKING ABOUT WITH THE FRANCHISE.
(And yes, the toilet gun barrel was unforgivable!)
Bravo!
They probably did that because of feminism. I suppose the rise of third-wave feminism made them rethink the character, and oh yeah Fleming wrote him as a man, and he didn't create the M prefix for a woman.
How dare they create something that became iconic to the franchise, even though this one change with 007 will be occuring for one bloody film.
I'm not really sure that posting a video showing how a man can be sexist helps anything! :D
Sorry to say but this is not relevant. If M/Q/MP isn't in one bond film I won't be bothered about it remember FYEO where M wasn't in the film. James bond is a central or should I say main character of the film, you don't toy around with the main character.
Okay, one it is relevant and two what isn't relevant is whether M/Q or MP are in a film because that's not what we're talking about. James Bond IS IN THE FILM, his codename has just been given to another character who will still be the main Bond girl role. Simple.
Okay, so you are saying you have a problem with her race and gender. Gotcha.
Why on earth are you worried about that? They're not replacing Bond. You're worried about something entirely in your own head. And you seem to be scared of it, which is even more worrying.
You said that they changed M's gender that is what I am responding to. M/Q/MP isn't the main character of the film that's why it's easy to change their gender and many people including myself won't be bothered by it. But when it comes to James bond 007 sorry a big No. Simple
Fleming didn't put James Bond in space, in a Lotus Esprit, give him a signature gun, make him wear a monkey suit, give him a house called Skyfall, have him join the Taliban, have a fight on Golden Gate bridge, do a barrel roll in a car, bungee jump off a dam, drive a tank through St Petersberg... what's your point? :)
That’s why I’m taking the wait and see approach — because I want to know WHERE they are going with this. Will it have the intended effect at the end of the day or will they portray her as sloppy to lose her title or kill her off or what?
Again, there was no DAILY campaign to make M a woman back in the 90's. There was a gap and they decided to change the character because they wanted a new dynamic, thats fine. Same goes for Moneypenny, it came out of the blue and the fact that her identity was a secret at first, it was more unexpected. But the problem, as I have said many times now, is that there has for a long time been a slow drumroll for years from the progressive press with headlines to the tune of "isn't it about time Bond became..." and this story decision of having Bond replaced by a strong, "beautiful, black" woman reaks of pandering to that crowd.
THEY'RE NOT CHANGING HIS GENDER!!!!!!!!!!
What I'm saying is, if they can change the gender of a popular character and it can work, they can give a codename to another character of a different gender too.
I simply stated an idea if they make a film/Netflix series on her I would be okay with it. Learn to read .
The concept of consumerism is free choice. No film studio should expect anyone to willingly handover money to see their product on blind faith alone. Clearly audiences didn't feel the same way about SP which is why it saw a box office drop to SF. Are you saying those that saw SF should've seen SP just because it was a Bond movie regardless whether it was as any good or not? People are entitled to see what they want. If they don't like it for the narrative then they don't pay to go see it.
Personally, I don't care for the 007 prefix being handed out to another person in the same movie regardless of race or gender. Had this happened in one of Roger Moore or Brosnan's Bond movies, I'd have disliked it equally. Look, if it was such a great idea, why didn't Richard Maibaum or anyone else for that matter use it? According to sources it wasn't Scott Z. Burns or veterans Neal Purvis and Robert Wade that even came up with this lousy idea. It was self proclaimed pro-feminist Phoebe Waller-Bridge who had her own political agenda to push. As I pointed out in a post above, this could be a means of priming audiences for big upheavals in the future. Also, I know you didn't watch that video, @Denbigh, as you replied too quickly to have done so, but my point is you don't have to be white not to like this idea and to suggest anyone that doesn't like it is some closet racist is totally libellous. As I said on another thread, I'd have hated it had Lily James been cast in the same role as were the original rumours on Reddit. I just don't like the ease with which the 007 prefix has been handed out. Bond was thought to be dead in SF but was his prefix handed out to another agent in his absence? Surely the same logic applies in both situations? The reason why Purvis and Wade didn't introduce another 007 replacement in SF was because it's not a very good idea and would've cluttered the narrative.
I'm not going to say I'm going to avoid this at the cinema yet as I don't know enough about this movie, but based on rumours alone Eon have their work cut out to convince me this is the Bond movie I want to see after a 5-year wait. Who knows? It might be fantastic and I'm convinced to go see it. It's far too early to say right now.